Author |
Topic  |
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
 
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2013 : 14:35:47
|
Wrong again, luc. The fella was with his prior wife from pixies days till show me your tears. Every one of your theories is shit.
You know good music from bad music? It's fucking subjective.
The word blowhard comes to mind.
------------------------------ they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
 |
|
fumanbru
* Dog in the Sand *
 
Canada
1462 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 01:10:22
|
quote: Originally posted by lucmove
I wasn't trying to "make it his fault." I have been speculating that he is tired, which makes sense in light of how much he's done already. Another theory: maybe he is not very interested, which is pretty normal given his age, and that he is now a lot older, married, has kids etc. Maybe he is doing this Pixies thing now because he knows he won't be able to do it later, but he isn't really really into it.
________________ "- Thanks!"
I enjoy reading your posts luc. Even though I don’t agree with some of it you put a lot of thought into it. I see where you are coming from that Frank has a large family and he’s been doing this for a long time and maybe he’s getting worn out a bit. I have 2 young kids and things do get “busy” but I think a lot of people are able to adapt and you don’t necessarily lose your mojo.
I for one really enjoy the new songs and don’t think he’s not into it. I was really impressed with the itunes festival. I’m a huge fan and love most of his work. Some of his stuff didn’t do much for me at first but over time I often got a new appreciation/perspective. Frank deserves a lot of respect. He's worked really hard, put out a huge impressive body of work, taken a lot of risks, has gone in many different directions, and put up with a lot of crap. Obviously a lot of fans and music critics have some pretty high expectations on the new material and there are going to be varying opinions. The new stuff has struck a chord with me and I’m really looking forward to what’s ahead!
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!! |
 |
|
johnnyribcage
* Dog in the Sand *
 
USA
1301 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 01:51:50
|
Holy shit lucmove. Wow man. Jesus.
Dial 1-888-RIB-CAGE for your free Bag Boy instruction manual. |
 |
|
Stevio10
* Dog in the Sand *
 
United Kingdom
1133 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 02:09:45
|
Allow me to present quotes from lucmove which he has posted previously;
"Dissing Kim Gordon is foolish. She is sexy and does her job pretty well with the bass. Why should there be any loftier expectations around her? What is wrong with being just good?"
- What is wrong with being just good? Im sure you have told us being 'just good' does not cut it.
Another classic quote;
"I am not so radical. I like a lot of shameless commercial music and I am not ashamed of it. I love the Spice Girls. Seriously."
- Kind of eliminates any credibility you have dude.
But this is not about showing lucmove that he is a hypocrite, he does that quite well by himself.
The purpose of this post is to show that using quotes out of context can pretty much be used in any argument you wish to make. |
 |
|
trobrianders
> Teenager of the Year <
  
Papua New Guinea
3302 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 03:23:01
|
quote: Originally posted by lucmove
quote: Originally posted by trobrianders I don't get how you can question his credibility without making reference to say, http://amherststuckists.com/
I had no idea that site existed. I had only seen one of Charles' paintings so far. Either way, I don't really understand what you mean. If you care to elaborate... ________________ "- Thanks!"
Let me be clear (clearer than John Kerry even!), you were judging Charles' recent years as an artist on your disdain for a recent 4 song EP he probably knocked off in a weekend. That's kinda silly. Something like Amherst Stuckists deserves far more attention from your discerning eye if his credentials as an artist of late is really what's concerning you.
I gotta say though, some of the hate you're getting is worse than silly.
_______________ Ed is the hoo hoo |
 |
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
 
1446 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 11:47:55
|
I think lucmove's folly is that he's trying very hard to find a magic key that "explains" why Frank's new music isn't good. He can't just say "I don't like this" and move on with his life. He instead needs conspiracy theories about Frank's motives. Sometimes the results are creepy personal insults directed toward Frank. He's trying fit that subjective square peg into an objective round hole. If you ask me, it's not working out for him.
Still, he's harmless. |
 |
|
lucmove
- FB Fan -
Brazil
116 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 13:47:44
|
quote: Originally posted by Jose Jones Wrong again, luc. The fella was with his prior wife from pixies days till show me your tears. Every one of your theories is shit.
That doesn't make my theory shit. That marriage is over, and I don't know why it ended. Maybe it was neglected to some extent and that's why his output was so much better back then. A lot of people neglect their relationships. I have neglected, I have been neglected, it's absolutely common. I will never know. As long as that is possible, my theory makes sense.
quote: Originally posted by Jason I think lucmove's folly is that he's trying very hard to find a magic key that "explains" why Frank's new music isn't good. He can't just say "I don't like this" and move on with his life. He instead needs conspiracy theories about Frank's motives. Sometimes the results are creepy personal insults directed toward Frank. He's trying fit that subjective square peg into an objective round hole. If you ask me, it's not working out for him.
Still, he's harmless.
I can agree with that assessment, except the personal insults part. I am not insulting anyone, just criticizing work, and hardly being personal or creepy about it.
The problem is that I go hard against the grain here. Everyone here seems to enforce some kind of adoration mood, something I've never had. Artists, politicians, athletes or kings are just people, nothing more than people. FBF makes really great music, better than most people in history IMO, but he's still a man and can fail from time to time.
Yes, I'm harmless, but that's because I have a very small audience, assuming I still have an audience here. It seems the press tends to agree with me, and that's something that has to be taken into consideration by anyone who cares. The Pixies were revered by the press, now they're briefly viewed with some degree of bewilderment or disappointment. Something's happened and I (clearly) don't think that ignoring it is the best thing to do. The world is not as lenient as this forum is with its demigod.
I don't mind that you lot are so strict with everything I say here. I think that's healthy. I just wish you were a little strict on the demigod, too. For example, his response to Pitchfork was really lame. He raises his hand and says, "I want to defend Pitchfork..."
Wow, let's see that!
"Well, it's called Pitchfork! That name alone indicates they're out to skewer people, of course they are going to disapprove our new release."
Lame. He completely sidestepped the fact that Pitchfork gives high ratings to many records. The interviewer still pointed out that some other publication gave the EP a 5 out of 10, which is still low for the Pixies. BF could have argued that the critic has too particular a taste, wasn't impartial, or didn't listen to the record properly, but instead BF chose to attack the name of the blog. And I have to be the only one who points that out, because he can do no wrong before your eyes.
OK, whatever. I disagree, but won't call you names because of that.
________________ "- Thanks!" |
 |
|
lucmove
- FB Fan -
Brazil
116 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 14:14:50
|
quote: Originally posted by Stevio10
Allow me to present quotes from lucmove which he has posted previously;
"Dissing Kim Gordon is foolish. She is sexy and does her job pretty well with the bass. Why should there be any loftier expectations around her? What is wrong with being just good?"
- What is wrong with being just good? Im sure you have told us being 'just good' does not cut it.
I can see your point, but you're missing two points: 1) I don't care as much about Sonic Youth. I don't even read their fan forum. 2) Kim Gordon has always been... that. No change. I see a very clear change in FBF's work, and I think it's for the worse. Hence my grousing.
quote: Originally posted by Stevio10 Another classic quote;
"I am not so radical. I like a lot of shameless commercial music and I am not ashamed of it. I love the Spice Girls. Seriously."
- Kind of eliminates any credibility you have dude.
Why? Where is the hipocrisy? If you like to pay so much attention to everything I write, please remember to point out that I put a lot of value into overall concept, consistency and what I call "character." The Spice Girls had a veeeeery different concept, and were faithful to it all the way, though their career was pretty short. There is a lot of good commercial music out there that only tries to entertain for a while, and that's OK. But The Pixies have always been a lot more than that. If the concept or purpose of the Pixies is going to change now, OK, they can do it, but then there is going to be friction. Obviously! I shouldn't have to explain that.
quote: Originally posted by Stevio10 The purpose of this post is to show that using quotes out of context can pretty much be used in any argument you wish to make.
Ah, well, mission accomplished.
You guys keep getting all worked up over some criticism. AC/DC has been criticised a lot, just to name one band. Well, I think they have always been very consistent. So much so that they have been accused of making the same album three or four times. That's the other end of an extreme. Iron Maiden has been criticised many times. I have friends who are crazy about Iron Maiden but grimace when I ask them about the Blaze Bailey era. Heck, there was criticism INSIDE Iron Maiden: they refused to record songs that Bruce Dickinson had written. They told it to his face that his songs weren't up to snuff. The Pixies told Kim Deal that her songs weren't up to snuff. It happens. But god forbid anyone DARES say that anything that Black Francis does is not up to snuff. Come on...
________________ "- Thanks!" |
 |
|
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
 
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 14:47:31
|
lucmove, it's fine that you and the press don't think Pixies 2 is up to snuff. as it's been stated many times in this thread, we all have criticisms of fbf's work from some point or another. the problem i have with your arguments is that you keep trotting out possible explanations and each one gets debunked. it seems that in the end YOU are the one who can't admit to disliking something just because you don't like it. that's all the reason there needs to be.
i honestly love that last Britney Spears album. i love to piss on U2. i crank up weird hits that i love ("stars" by simply red, "save your love" by bad boys blue) but the National can go fuck themselves. it's my taste and i don't really need to explain it.
can you please stop trying to explain why your taste is RIGHT and giving reasons as to why the artist you follow is WRONG? it doesn't make sense and is a waste of your time.
got any pet peeves? please head on over to General Chat and be the quality boardmember i know you can be!
------------------------------ they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
 |
|
fumanbru
* Dog in the Sand *
 
Canada
1462 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 15:47:58
|
quote: Originally posted by lucmove
For example, his response to Pitchfork was really lame. He raises his hand and says, "I want to defend Pitchfork..."
Wow, let's see that!
"Well, it's called Pitchfork! That name alone indicates they're out to skewer people, of course they are going to disapprove our new release."
Lame.
i particularly like frank's response. the pitchfork score of 1 out of 10 is a total joke. a score of 1. really?? that's lame. how can you take that seriously. if the reviewer doesn't like the music - fine, but try to be a little bit objective. the review was way too personal and immature. the guy is disappointed the new music doesn't live up to his expectations. those are unrealistic expectations. fine- take 2 points off the scale for it not being as good as doolittle and then move on and review the 4 songs on it's own merit. and the reviewer comes across as being pissed cause it's an ep. things have changed. the industry has changed. just review the music and give it an objective score.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!! |
 |
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
 
1446 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 16:07:47
|
It's not a good idea to spend time trying to PROVE that your opinion is right. Most especially when it comes to something as nebulous (and I would even say frivolous) as music taste. All you're gonna do is beat your head against a wall (and hey, maybe you like that.)
I love the new EP. I played it four times today in the car. To me, these are quintessential Frank Black/Black Francis songs.
Can I PROVE that this record is good? No. I can't prove shit, nor would I care to do that. The best I can do it meet you halfway and explain why I, personally, like it. I'm not a lawyer arguing in a murder case. I'm just some guy in Texas who really enjoys a record. I'm in a very humble position.
And so are you. Just like I can't prove that it's good, you can't prove that it's bad. And that's fine.
There hasn't been a cool thing ever created on Earth that everyone likes.
In the end, Frank summed up all of this stuff much better in "Freedom Rock". |
 |
|
IBreed
= Cult of Ray =

310 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 17:03:23
|
The ep is a 6.5/10. I think that's fair. The ridiculously negative reviews and fanclub circle jerk will subside in a couple of months, especially if ep 2 proves to be better. I've noticed fans often don't feel comfortable speaking critically of their favorite band's work until they have something to champion. I get it.
While it's likely not fair to say Frank doesn't care, there is a certain remove there. Ep 1 is weirdly slapdash in construction, alphabetical track list and all. It's not a quality I've noticed in his other works. I think it's another safe guard from criticism in a sense.
|
 |
|
lucmove
- FB Fan -
Brazil
116 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 18:23:03
|
quote: Originally posted by fumanbru i particularly like frank's response. the pitchfork score of 1 out of 10 is a total joke. a score of 1. really?? that's lame. how can you take that seriously. if the reviewer doesn't like the music - fine, but try to be a little bit objective. the review was way too personal and immature. the guy is disappointed the new music doesn't live up to his expectations. those are unrealistic expectations. fine- take 2 points off the scale for it not being as good as doolittle and then move on and review the 4 songs on it's own merit. and the reviewer comes across as being pissed cause it's an ep. things have changed. the industry has changed. just review the music and give it an objective score.
Well, I think your response is excellent. Too bad Charles didn't say any of that.
By the way, here is another theory of mine, this time something y'all are likely to get behind:
I suspect that Pitchfork did that for publicity. 1 out of 10 is indeed absurdly low. I think they saw the record wasn't good and could have given it at least 5 (I would), but knew that giving a 1 to the fucking Pixies would cause some always welcome noise on the internets. What happened: the review was mentioned in the WSJ interview. They certainly got a lot of page views with that. Internet 101.
________________ "- Thanks!" |
 |
|
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
 
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2013 : 18:43:17
|
good point on that one. frank's response is good assuming he's never read the site and is only vaguely aware it's an online music mag. i'd be surprised if that were actually the case.
------------------------------ they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
 |
|
Stevio10
* Dog in the Sand *
 
United Kingdom
1133 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 02:23:37
|
I still think the Pitchfork review is motivated by the Grand Duchy 'Let the People Speak' review and backlash from 2012.
The Pixies EP was the next FBF related release and its not too far fetched to think music journos, especially at the same site, will hold a grudge.
Dont really want to dig up the issue as its in the past but there is a long thread about what happened and might help explain Pitchforks disdain; http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=20344&whichpage=4
I think FBF's response to the EP1 review is to take it on the chin and move on. |
 |
|
fumanbru
* Dog in the Sand *
 
Canada
1462 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 03:08:56
|
A score of 5/10 is fair. As a fan I give it a 9 and if I was a reviewer I would probably give it a 7.5. I know a lot of people don’t care about scores on reviews. I for one, love reading movie and music reviews. I love that someone has taken the time to objectively review and provide intelligent insight to a work of art. Artists take a huge financial risk in pursuing a career in the arts. I respect that. I love that. They should get paid fairly and the market rate. That's the society we created. So when a reviewer gives a completely unfair score I get pissed! That affects the artist’s livelihood. I would read pitchfork more often but they lack credibility when they pull shit like that.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!! |
 |
|
Grotesque
= Cult of Ray =

France
777 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 04:56:29
|
quote:
i particularly like frank's response. the pitchfork score of 1 out of 10 is a total joke. a score of 1. really?? that's lame. how can you take that seriously. if the reviewer doesn't like the music - fine, but try to be a little bit objective. the review was way too personal and immature. the guy is disappointed the new music doesn't live up to his expectations. those are unrealistic expectations. fine- take 2 points off the scale for it not being as good as doolittle and then move on and review the 4 songs on it's own merit. and the reviewer comes across as being pissed cause it's an ep. things have changed. the industry has changed. just review the music and give it an objective score.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!!
What? No! Music and art in general are totaly subjective, so it has to be excessive sometimes, 1/10 is a good expression of someone decieved and pissed off. By the way, Frank's response seemed to understand that: i wonder why you liked his well balanced, mature and ironic response! "Realistic expectations"? Comon you want to live in such a boring world? If the guy is pissed off, fine! I'm an adult and i'm not him, so i'll read this and make my own opinion. Maybe for imature readers that believe everything they read that could be diferent. The guy loved the pixies, all the article is about that, he cant and musnt be objective. If you are truly objective dont listen to any music at all, it'll hurt your ears. |
Edited by - Grotesque on 10/14/2013 05:03:42 |
 |
|
Jason
* Dog in the Sand *
 
1446 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 05:02:23
|
Frank has been making music constantly for almost thirty years now. He's seen it all. Good reviews, bad reviews. Celebration, indifference. Less experienced musicians get bothered by bad reviews. For a guy like him, it's nothing new. Just another day in the life of a musician. |
 |
|
Grotesque
= Cult of Ray =

France
777 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 05:08:22
|
Yeah but it's not just experience (some musicians dont care at all from the very begining), it must be some self control too: we all know Frank owns some kind of no-nonsense anti-conceptual way of thinking, both down to earth and instinctive. How many times did he answered "I dont know" to a conceptual answer? In the end we all know he really depreciate those guys, the only thing different is now he wont get angry anymore (or at least not that often; or more ironically, wiser). It's what usually happens when you realize killing them all wont be a good idea. |
Edited by - Grotesque on 10/14/2013 05:19:34 |
 |
|
fumanbru
* Dog in the Sand *
 
Canada
1462 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 05:47:58
|
quote: Originally posted by Grotesque
quote:
i particularly like frank's response. the pitchfork score of 1 out of 10 is a total joke. a score of 1. really?? that's lame. how can you take that seriously. if the reviewer doesn't like the music - fine, but try to be a little bit objective. the review was way too personal and immature. the guy is disappointed the new music doesn't live up to his expectations. those are unrealistic expectations. fine- take 2 points off the scale for it not being as good as doolittle and then move on and review the 4 songs on it's own merit. and the reviewer comes across as being pissed cause it's an ep. things have changed. the industry has changed. just review the music and give it an objective score.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!!
What? No! Music and art in general are totaly subjective, so it has to be excessive sometimes, 1/10 is a good expression of someone decieved and pissed off. By the way, Frank's response seemed to understand that: i wonder why you liked his well balanced, mature and ironic response! "Realistic expectations"? Comon you want to live in such a boring world? If the guy is pissed off, fine! I'm an adult and i'm not him, so i'll read this and make my own opinion. Maybe for imature readers that believe everything they read that could be diferent. The guy loved the pixies, all the article is about that, he cant and musnt be objective. If you are truly objective dont listen to any music at all, it'll hurt your ears.
right. music and art are totally subjective. reviews are subjective but should also strive to be somewhat objective. i just thought the score of the review was total bullshit and unfair. i don't get all the reviews that are largely based on comparing the new material to a body of work from 20 years ago. a lot of stuff has happened to these musicians in the last 20 years to shape who they are today. yes, the past is important but once i learned to let go of "expectations" i started to see a whole new world and better enjoy things. ya, it's good to question things and be critical but balance is equally important.
and it’s probably also very challenging for a music reviewer to have the time to do a proper review rather than just basing it on initial feelings. i don’t believe the ep was sent to critics before the release to the public. it takes time for the music to sink in and properly analyze and i’m sure these reviewers are under some pretty tight time constraints to get their review out.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!! |
Edited by - fumanbru on 10/14/2013 05:56:47 |
 |
|
Jose Jones
* Dog in the Sand *
 
USA
1758 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2013 : 07:40:46
|
quote: Originally posted by Grotesque
quote:
i particularly like frank's response. the pitchfork score of 1 out of 10 is a total joke. a score of 1. really?? that's lame. how can you take that seriously. if the reviewer doesn't like the music - fine, but try to be a little bit objective. the review was way too personal and immature. the guy is disappointed the new music doesn't live up to his expectations. those are unrealistic expectations. fine- take 2 points off the scale for it not being as good as doolittle and then move on and review the 4 songs on it's own merit. and the reviewer comes across as being pissed cause it's an ep. things have changed. the industry has changed. just review the music and give it an objective score.
"I joined the Cult of Frank/ cause I'm a real go-getter!"...long live snitz!!
What? No! Music and art in general are totaly subjective, so it has to be excessive sometimes, 1/10 is a good expression of someone decieved and pissed off. By the way, Frank's response seemed to understand that: i wonder why you liked his well balanced, mature and ironic response! "Realistic expectations"? Comon you want to live in such a boring world? If the guy is pissed off, fine! I'm an adult and i'm not him, so i'll read this and make my own opinion. Maybe for imature readers that believe everything they read that could be diferent. The guy loved the pixies, all the article is about that, he cant and musnt be objective. If you are truly objective dont listen to any music at all, it'll hurt your ears.
i like your take on it.
------------------------------ they were the heroes of old, men of renown. |
 |
|
Topic  |
|